The Thomas Crown Affair (1999) - FAQ The content of this page was created directly by users and has not been screened or verified by IMDb staff. Visit our FAQ Help to learn more FAQ How much sex, violence, and profanity are in this movie? For detailed information about the amounts and types of (a) sex and nudity, (b) violence and gore, (c) profanity, (d) alcohol, drugs, and smoking, and (e) frightening and intense scenes in this movie, consult the IMDb Parents Guide for this movie. The Parents Guide for The Thomas Crown Affair can be found here . What is 'The thomas Crown Affair' about? Billionaire Thomas Crown ( Pierce Brosnan ) is bored and in search of a challenge, so he decides to steal a painting by Claude Monet, worth $100 million dollars, from the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. Insurance investigator Catherine Banning ( Rene Russo ) is certain that the thief is Thomas Crown and intends to catch him. Things get complicated when Catherine and Thomas fall in love. Is 'The Thomas Crown Affair' based on a book?

The Thomas Crown Affair is a remake of the 1968 film The Thomas Crown Affair . The screenplay for the original movie was written by American screenwriter Alan Trustman. It was adapted for this remake by American screenwriters Leslie Dixon and Kurt Wimmer. How did Catherine come to suspect Thomas Crown? In the original movie, the insurance investigator came upon Crown's name by cross-checking airline records to see who had traveled to Switzerland multiple times since the robbery. Thomas was one of eight suspects, and her instincts told her that he was the one. In the remake, Catherine compiles a list of bidders at recent auctions of Monet's paintings, and Thomas Crown is at the head of the list. When Crown lends another painting of a similar size to compensate for the museum's loss, Catherine is certain that there is a connection and sets out to find it. What is a Trojan Horse? The thieves came into the museum in a hollow statue of a horse that they called a 'Trojan horse.' This is in reference to the end of the Trojan War in Greek mythology in which the Greeks pretended to retreat and left behind a huge wooden horse filled with soldiers.

When the Trojans discovered that the Greeks were gone, they believed the war was over and dragged the horse inside the city. The following night, the Greeks left the wooden horse and attacked the unsuspecting Trojans, subsequently conquering Troy. Can an oil painting really bend like that and then return to its original shape with no creases? Taking into account the age of painting, the type of oil used, the thickness of the oil, and the manner in which it is folded, the canvas could possibly be folded (and apparently was) without harm. On the DVD commentary, the director explains that there were more shots showing how the canvas could be folded without ruining the painting. What couldn't be folded, however, is the wooden stretcher frame to which the canvas is affixed...yet the canvas is still attached to the unbroken stretcher when Crown later takes the painting out of his briefcase. It was explained that the plan was to have the briefcase outfitted with knives that would precisely cut the stretcher without harming the canvas when the briefcase was closed. However, all this explaining slowed down the scene too much, so they cut them out and figured most people wouldn't notice that the briefcase was half the size of the painting.

What does Catherine say when she's interrogating the Romanian thief? First Catherine asks him in French: 'Vous aimez les Etats-Unis?' (Do you like the United States?) to which he doesn't reply, so she asks in German: 'Sehen Sie gerne Gangsterfilme...mit Edward G. Robertson?' (Do you like gangster movies...with Edward G. Robertson)? He snickers, so she continues. 'Seine Familie stammt aus Rumï¿½nien' (His family is from Romania). He answers: 'Ich will einen Rechtsanwalt' (I want a lawyer) to which Catherine replies 'Aber Sie sind doch kein Staatsbï¿½rger...Da gibt's keinen Prozess...Sie werden ganz einfach deportiert...Rumï¿½ner ohne Ausweise machen uns nervï¿½s... nervï¿½s...Die kï¿½nnten Securitat sein...Deine Regierung nimmt Geheimpolizei... Was die mit dir machen... hm?' (But you are no U.S. citizen...There won't be a trial...You will simply be deported...Romanians without ID cards make us nervous...

nervous...They could be Securitat (from the Romanian Secret Service)...Your government takes Secret Police... What they'll do with you... hm?) How did Catherine get Thomas' keys and get them back to him without him knowing? When they were in the museum, she says it's cold so Crown puts his jacket on her shoulders. She grabs his keys from his coat and puts it on a display stand. One of the cops in disguise takes it from the stand. Thomas and Catherine go to dinner, and the cop brings the original keys to the restaurant. Later, as she kisses Thomas goodnight, Catherine slips his keys back into his pocket. Where did they go on their island vacation? Thomas' private jet flies him and Catherine off to a beautiful island where they spend 'two days and two nights'. The island is not identified in the movie, other than NOT being Manhattan. It was Martinique, a French island located in the east Caribbean. Martinique can be seen (off to the right) on this map . A press release detailing how Martinique was chosen for The Thomas Crown Affair can be read here . What are the names of the paintings used in the movie?

In order of appearance, the principle paintings are: (1) Crown's favorite, 'Haystacks', is actually 'Noon: Rest from Work (after Millet)' by Vincent van Gogh, (2) the invaluable Monet is 'San Giorgio Maggiore by Twilight' (a view of the monastery island of San Giorgio), (3) the man in a bowler hat with a green apple in front of his face (hanging in Thomas' study) is 'Son of Man' by Renï¿½ Magritte, (4) the loaner to the museum is 'The Artist's Garden at Aragny' by Camille Pissaro, (5) Catherine's favorite (and the second painting to be stolen) is 'The Banks of the Seine at Argenteuil' by Edouard Manet, (6) the woman riding on the bow of a boat (seen in the stairwell in Thomas' house) is 'Certain Uncertainties' by Christian Vincent, (7) the group of women looking into a pool of water (hanging over Thomas' bed) is 'The Mirror of Venus' by Sir Edward Burne-Jones, and (8) the ghost painting of the

 dogs playing cards is 'Poker Sympathy' by C.M.

Coolidge (one of a series of nine paintings he did of Dogs Playing Poker). What did Catherine mean by 'I'll break BOTH of your arms'? Catherine is referring to Magritte's 'Son of Man'. A subtle feature of that painting is that the man's left arm appears to bend backwards as if broken at the elbow. Since Thomas models himself as the man in the bowler hat, Catherine is remarking that she'll break his right arm as well as the already broken left. Why did Thomas pursue Catherine after she betrayed him? Thomas had previously informed Catherine that he would be disappointed if she backed off. He wanted someone uncompromising, someone like him, or as the psychiatrist ( Faye Dunaway ) termed it, a 'worthy adversary.' In fact, the entire ending, like the test using Anna Knudsen ( Esther Cañadas ) to make Catherine jealous, was a set up. Thomas knew that, if Catherine were true to herself, she'd have to bust him at the museum.

However, he gave her a second chance not to betray him again by bringing cops to the helipad and, when she didn't, he pursued her onto the plane, finally certain that her love for him was real and not just a function of her job. How did Thomas manage to steal the second painting before setting off the fire alarm? That little detail is not explained in the movie, and most viewers come to see that mystery as part of Thomas' ingenuity. Not only has he fooled both Catherine and the police, but he's fooled the audience, too. However, there are a few ways that it can be logically explained. Since the Impressionism wing was sealed off, someone (maybe Thomas, maybe one of the men in the bowler hats, or maybe someone inconspicuous, hired by Thomas for the sole purpose of stealing the painting) might have gotten in the wing, perhaps through the skylight or the airducts (there is a scene showing the burglars at the beginning of the movie dropping down from the airducts), and taken out the painting while everyone was chasing after the men in the bowlers.

However, as the protective covers begin sliding over the walls, the camera shows various shots of the walls revealing that all the pictures are still in place. If that's the case, then logic says the painting must have been stolen from behind the wall. In the original screenplay, it was apparently explained that there were passageways behind the wall, evidenced in the movie when the schoolgirl appears to be listening to sounds coming from within the walls. However, when they shot the scene of the second painting being gone, the frame was hanging on an interior wall, making the original plan unworkable. By leaving it as an unsolved mystery (actually an error in continuity), it adds to the question that everyone is asking: 'How did he do that?' Was it ever explained how Thomas got the Impressionist room 10 degrees hotter than the rest of the museum in order to block the cameras? After the thieves cut the wires on the air conditioning unit, the temperature in the Impressionism wing would begin to rise, commensurate with the fact that it was a hot day as mentioned in the movie. The numbers of warm bodies in the room would also add to the buildup.

Some viewers have suggested that the direct sun from the overhead skylight would act like a greenhouse and further increase the heat. It was curious, however, that the same lack of air conditioning and buildup of ambient heat still allowed images to show up on the cameras, whereas the camera in the Monet room was a total washout, suggesting that there was an additional heat source somewhere in that room. When Catherine discovered 'the third leg', the briefcase under the bench that Thomas planted during an earlier visit and in which he later carried out the Monet, she theorized that it might have held a compact heater. If the heater was not in the briefcase, it was elsewhere in the room (e.g., the air duct). How does the movie end? As promised, Thomas shows up at the museum, carrying his briefcase and intending to return the Monet. Catherine and the police are watching his every move. He places a bowler hat on his head and walks toward the gallery. Suddenly another tall man in a dark suit and wearing a bowler walks by and switches briefcases with Thomas.

This is followed by a third man in a bowler, then a fourth, and a fifth, until it becomes obvious that there are dozens of tall men in dark suits wearing bowlers, all walking around and switching briefcases with each other, making it impossible for the police to tell who is holding the Monet. Unsure of what to do, the police start rounding up all the men in bowler hats and opening their briefcases only to find piles of photos of Magritte's 'Son of Man'. Meanwhile, Thomas has changed his clothes. While the police are distracted, he releases three smoke bombs into the Impressionism gallery and triggers the emergency smoke alarm. Protective covers begin rolling across the walls, concealing all of the paintings with the exception of Manet's 'The Artist's Garden at Aragny', Thomas' loaner. Then the sprinklers switch on. Right before everyone's eyes, 'The Artist's Garden at Aragny' begins to bleed its paint, revealing the Monet underneath, safe and sound. When the smoke clears and the protective covers roll back, it is immediately apparent that Manet's 'The Banks of the Seine at Argenteuil' is now missing.

Now that the Monet has been returned, Catherine's job is finished so, with only 20 minutes before she must meet Thomas at the helipad, she heads for the exit but is stopped by Detective McCann ( Denis Leary ). He admits that he's probably not going to pursue Thomas because he's no longer interested in wasting his time on rich people's games when there are people who really need his help. Catherine takes her leave, hails a cab, and races to the helipad where she finds Thomas and a helicopter waiting. When he turns around, however, it is just another tall man wearing a dark suit and a bowler. He greets her politely and hands her a portfolio case. Catherine opens it to find Manet's painting. Realizing that her betrayal has cost her the relationship with Thomas, Catherine purchases an airline ticket home and gives the portfolio to the ticket agent, requesting that she return it to the police. As her plane approaches its altitude, Catherine begins to cry. She is handed a handkerchief from the person in the seat behind her and turns to see Thomas sitting there. 'Did you set this up!?!' she screams at him and leaps over the seat and into his arms.

In the final scene, she warns him, 'If you pull a stunt like that again, I'll break BOTH of your arms.' Michael B. Jordan in ‘Thomas Crown Affair’ Remake | Variety Rob Latour/Variety/REX/Shutterstock February 24, 2016 | 09:33AM PT “Creed’s” Michael B. Jordan is starring in MGM ’s second remake of “The Thomas Crown Affair.” The reboot is in early development stages and has no producer, writer or director attached. Jordan teamed with MGM on “Creed,” which was distributed by Warner Bros. and performed well with $172 million worldwide. The original “Thomas Crown Affair,” directed by Norman Jewison, was released in 1968. Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway starred in the film in which McQueen’s character masterminded a Boston bank robbery of $2.66 million without meeting any of the four thieves. Dunaway played the insurance investigator who realized that Crown had orchestrated the heist. Director John McTiernan’s 1999 remake starred Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo.

The film was a solid hit, grossing $124 million worldwide. Jordan came to Hollywood’s attention as a drug dealer in “The Wire” and in the indie drama “Fruitvale Station.” He starred as Adonis Creed, son of Apollo Creed, in “Creed.” Jordan is repped by WME. The news was first reported by the Hollywood Reporter. Thomas Crown Affair, The - Ethics & Public Policy Center Ethics & Public Policy Center By James Bowman Share The Thomas Crown Affair, a remake by John McTiernan of the classic of 1968 which starred Steve McQueen, is what I like to call a designer movie. True, it is also a cleverly conceived heist caper whose interesting premiss is that a rich man, the eponymous Mr. Crown (Pierce Brosnan), in search of excitement will turn art thief just to see if he can defeat the security system at the Metropolitan Museum of Art — and then put the stolen painting (a Monet said to be worth $100 million) back on the museum wall in an even more clever and daring exercise in thumbing his nose at authority.

Yet that exercise conveys little of the excitement for which the hero presumably undertakes it — because it is really only a part of the film’s larger purpose, which is simply to look as cool as possible. To some extent, this was also true of the original, as the casting of Steve McQueen might suggest. Hollywood’s great Mr. Cool in the 1960s, McQueen foreshadowed the movie stars of our own time, whose job is usually to strike attitudes, like models, rather than to act — which would imply characters who are more complete human beings than we commonly encounter in the movies. The early James Bond films were also prefigurings of the designer movie of today, and it is no accident that the present Bond should have been chosen to take the McQueen role in the remake. Mr Brosnan is undoubtedly the most male-modelish of all the stars in the 90s firmament, and so is just what is wanted here. This is a movie which must be watched as you watch a particularly slick TV commercial or (better) in the spirit in which you pass your eye over a glossy magazine ad for Scotch whisky or watches or luxury cars or perfume or some designer label of clothing.

At its most dramatically convincing it rises to the level of a music video. The love interest, Catherine Banning (Rene Russo), an insurance investigator who is the Javert to his Valjean, knows that he stole the painting and is willing to sleep with him to get it back. But she, too, is the captive of cool, which wrecks the potential moral drama in which she finds herself seduced not only by the man but by his moral outlook on the world as a private playground. For this is also the moral outlook of the film’s makers, and if the lovely Catherine has any scruples to countervail against the overwhelming appeal of elopement with her billionaire, we must simply take them for granted, for we never see what they are. From the beginning, neither she nor we are allowed to take in anything but pretty pictures of beautiful people doing the things rich and leisured people do, and with a style that only money can buy. Mr Crown sails; he glides; he dances (beautifully) with stunningly gorgeous young women at fantastically ritzy balls.

His business, like his recreations, is conducted without tedium or failure, and even his alleged love of the Monet is really more for the money. Art is just a particularly high-priced accessory. In the original, the ending at least allowed for some sense of the ironies of ambition in the case of Catherine — there played by Faye Dunaway (who appears in the new version in a useless role as Crown’s shrink—another accessory). The remake changes the ending and so ruins any more serious purpose the film might otherwise have had. The real heart of this movie comes on the morning after the couple have consummated their passion in a sex scene meant to suggest not real feeling or intimacy but sexual champagne and caviar. As they sit in their hotel-style white terrycloth robes at breakfast on the balcony of Crown’s sumptuous Manhattan residence, Catherine says to him, simply, “You live well.” And, equally simply, he thanks her. In this world it is the ultimate compliment. But it is not a statement which can be believed, I am afraid, by anyone whose idea of living well comes from anywhere other than a glossy magazine.

Favorite Scene from Thomas Crown Affair - YouTube Favorite Scene from Thomas Crown Affair Want to watch this again later? Sign in to add this video to a playlist. Need to report the video? Sign in to report inappropriate content. Rating is available when the video has been rented. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later. Published on Jun 5, 2012 The Thomas Crown Affair is a 1999 American heist film directed by John McTiernan. The film, starring Pierce Brosnan, Rene Russo and Denis Leary, is a remake of the 1968 film of the same name. Song - Sinner man by Nina Simone This video does not belong to me and no copyright infringement is intended. This video has been uploaded for educational purposes only. 7 Reasons Michael B. Jordan Is the Perfect Choice to Star in 'Thomas Crown Affair' Remake 7 Reasons Michael B. Jordan Is the Perfect Choice to Star in 'Thomas Crown Affair' Remake by Zach Seemayer 1:34 AM PST, February 25, 2016 Photo: Getty Images It looks like Michael B.

Jordan could be returning to the big screen as billionaire and part-time art thief, Thomas Crown! The Creed star is teaming up with MGM for a remake of The Thomas Crown Affair, according to The Hollywood Reporter . While the project is still in its earliest stages (no writer or director or other actors are yet attached), we can't help but already get excited. Here are seven reasons Jordan is absolutely perfect to star in The Thomas Crown Affair (and why the new remake could be a truly amazing film). PHOTOS: The '90s Are Back! Upcoming Retro Reboots 1. Michael B. Jordan Is Amazing Let's get this fact out of the way right off the bat. The 29-year-old star has given stellar performances in the acclaimed dramas Fruitvale Station and Creed, as well as the sci-fi/action flick Chronicle. He also showed off his comedy chops in That Awkward Moment, and we can't forget his role as Vince Howard in Friday Night Lights. We're pretty sure he could knock a heist/adventure/thriller out of the park.

According to reports, it was Jordan who came up with the potential story for this latest remake, meaning he'd be more than a little committed to crafting a compelling tale. 2. The Thomas Crown Affair Could Use Some Youth The original Thomas Crown Affair (1968) starred Steve McQueen as a billionaire bank executive who stole art for fun. In the 1999 remake, Pierce Brosnan played a cut-throat billionaire playboy who stole art for a rush. But what about the current spate of 20-something CEOs in the tech industry? They should be able to steal art for fun too. Jordan could flip the whole stuffy art-theft persona on its head with a portrayal of some programmer/developer who gains instant fame with some wild tech innovation, which also allows him to abscond with some classic paintings. This could change the character's cat-and-mouse dynamic with the sexy insurance investigator that's hot on his trail. 3. The Thomas Crown Affair Could Use Some Diversity The original film starred McQueen and Faye Dunaway, while the remake starred Brosnan and Rene Russo, with Denis Leary starring as the detective chasing Crown. Notice anything super similar about those casting choices?

Jordan could bring some much-needed diversity to the cast and to the story. It could challenge preconceptions of race among the industry elite and allow the story to explore new cultural avenues outside of Wall Street and the upper echelons of the one percent. WATCH: Michael B. Jordan Takes a Real Knockout Punch While Filming Creed 4. The World of Art Has Changed So Much Street artists like Banksy are bringing in millions for their counterculture, anti-authority creations while the pop pieces of artists like Jeff Koons are some of the most sought-after in the world. Art heists don't have to be confined to ripping off Monets or Magrittes. Aside from the art changing, the security industry has advanced so much it's insane. If Jordan's Thomas Crown was a tech-genius with a gift for hacking, the entire "heist" aspect of this remake could blow its predecessors out of the water. 5. So Much Potential for Social Commentary In our current social and political climate, The Thomas Crown Affair is the perfect opportunity to explore the wealth gap, the finance industry and racial injustice at all levels of society, With his work in Fruitvale Station, we already know Jordan doesn't shy away from stories with a message.

WATCH: Michael B. Jordan On His Exploding Career 6. Jordan Can Make a Suit Look Good Style and elegance always play a visual role in both iterations of The Thomas Crown Affair, which means Jordan would likely need to pull off wearing a suit like a pro. Photo: Getty Images Okay, we're sold. 7. Third Time's the Charm This would be the third attempt at telling this story, and since we've already gotten one (mostly) faithful remake, this one could have the luxury of going off-the-rails and taking viewers on a really wild ride. The more we think about it, there's no one we'd rather have along for the art-stealing adventure than Jordan. Just Call It the Rene Russo Affair - latimes YOU ARE HERE: LAT Home → Collections Movie Review Just Call It the Rene Russo Affair Actress' smart, gritty performance is the best thing about this remake of the stylish caper movie 'Thomas Crown.' August 06, 1999 |KENNETH TURAN | TIMES FILM CRITIC "The Thomas Crown Affair" plays by the rules.

A moderately diverting entertainment as sleek and aerodynamically sound as the glider its characters tool around in, it takes no extraordinary chances and delivers no major surprises. With one exception. For though Pierce Brosnan, whose production company initiated the idea of remaking the 1968 Steve McQueen-Faye Dunaway caper film with an eye toward his eventual starring role, it's Rene Russo, his opposite number, who makes the most of this chance. A former model, Russo has been in film for 10 years, holding down highly visible roles opposite some of Hollywood's biggest male stars: Clint Eastwood in "In the Line of Fire," John Travolta in "Get Shorty," Kevin Costner in "Tin Cup," Dustin Hoffman in "Outbreak" and Mel Gibson in two episodes of "Lethal Weapon." Yet it's a mark of how little space is left for women in male-dominated studio films that despite all that screen time, Russo's decade of sidekick-cupcake roles has never before given her the opportunity to create the kind of believable, engaging genre character she comes up with here.

Russo plays Catherine Banning, a smart, been-there insurance investigator for a major Swiss firm retained to look into the theft of a $100-million Monet from an unnamed New York museum that is a dead-ringer for the Metropolitan but, a prominent on-screen disclaimer insists, is a completely fictitious place. "This is an elegant crime done by an elegant person," Banning announces to the disgust of salt-of-the-earth New York police detective Michael McCann (Denis Leary), whose role consists exclusively of being exasperated whenever Banning says or does anything he wouldn't have himself. Banning's candidate is in fact the man we have seen commit the super-elaborate heist in the film's meticulous opening sequence, smoothly directed by John McTiernan of "Die Hard" and "The Hunt for Red October." That would be Thomas Crown (Brosnan), a completely suave individual in hand-tailored suits who wagers $100,000 on a golf shot with the kind of aplomb James Bond uses to order the perfect martini. But, despite all his wealth, Crown is no hero to his psychiatrist (Dunaway redux, in an uncertain cameo).

She knows that he has issues with trust, that he may be successful but that he's also a self-involved loner who has never met a woman he considers worthy of his regard. Which is why he is so tickled when he meets Banning, who tells him her suspicions straight away and boasts of always getting her man. Will she get him?, he wonders. "Oh, I hope so," Banning all but purrs. The opportunity for playful cat-and-mouse sparring is the reason "Thomas Crown" was worth the trouble of remaking. In fact, in an unusual maneuver, two writers with different skills were hired to do the script, with Kurt Wimmer writing the crisp heist sequences and Leslie Dixon doing the dicier but acceptable romantic dialogue. Once Banning and the gentleman thief set their sights on each other, part of "Thomas Crown" turns into a tepid "Lives of the Rich and Famous" travelogue, as the pair go glamorously hang-gliding and jet off to his charming island hideaway in Martinique.

More diverting is the psychological duel between these two game players, both powerfully allergic to being played for fools and uncertain if they can be both true to their unbending personal codes of behavior and still trust another person enough to let them into their lives. In this battle there's no doubt that Russo, with a different hairdo that accentuates the angles of her face, invests her character with the most involving weapons. Her Catherine Banning, handsomely costumed by Kate Harrington, has a feisty self-confidence that's capable of morphing into fury and flummoxing all the men in the immediate vicinity. It's a star turn--complete with a sassy dance in a much-publicized Halston dress and even more publicized nude scene--that's especially welcome because it comes from an actress who has not obviously been a star. One of the things that keeps "The Thomas Crown Affair" from taking full advantage of that performance is that Brosnan plays Crown like a human ice cube: cold, brittle and slippery. This character makes Brosnan's James Bond performances cuddly by comparison, and even McQueen, who was not the warmest actor going, registered as more of a recognizable human being.

Ignoring these limitations whenever he can, which is not always, McTiernan does a professional job of direction and delivers a civilized production that entertains well enough. And if this film's ending is less willing to be ambiguous than the original, that's just one more sign of the unadventurous movie times we live in. As if we really needed one. * MPAA rating: R, for some sexuality and language. Times guidelines: some nudity and an athletic sexual encounter that starts on a staircase. 'The Thomas Crown Affair' “The Thomas Crown Affair” - Salon.com Wednesday, Aug 11, 1999 4:00 PM UTC “The Thomas Crown Affair” Topics: Movies , Entertainment News “The Thomas Crown Affair” seems to take its cues from Bill Conti’s score: It’s sprightly, frisky and unexpectedly playful. Conti clears away the bombast that usually clutters his music just as director John McTiernan has cleared away the depressingly familiar clichis of big-budget entertainments.

“The Thomas Crown Affair” may turn out to be the most entertaining American movie of the summer, and there isn’t a car chase, a shootout or — unless you count a few smoke bombs — an explosion in sight. In other words, McTiernan pays the audience the supreme compliment of thinking they’ll be kept awake by wit and sexiness and the allure of his two stars, Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo, both of them shot like the most irresistible items on the most tempting dessert cart imaginable. Part caper picture, part cat-and-mouse romance, this remake of the 1968 picture starring Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway is closer in spirit to what the Bond movies used to be. It’s a deluxe vacation for adults with all frills included: glamorous settings, glamorous clothes, glamorous sex. As exotic settings go, New York might seem pretty pedestrian, but the city has put on its best fall colors for Tom Priestly’s camera. The residential streets are leafy, inviting rows of brownstones, the avenues bustling and made for strolling. There are a couple of spectacular views, showing New York shot in a way that I’ve never seen before.

One, from an airplane at night, recasts the metropolis as all glowing amber lights. In another, seen from the ocean, the city skyline peeks out of the mist enveloping the shore. That’s not a bad touch for a movie whose hero is devoted to Monet — so devoted that he heists one of the artist’s most famous paintings. Brosnan’s Thomas Crown is an acquisitions exec who acquisitions a Monet for his private pleasure. Russo’s Catherine Banning is the insurance investigator out to recover the high-toned swag and snag herself the tidy recovery fee. She pegs Crown as the culprit early on and doesn’t bother to hide her suspicions from him. The fun of the movie is seeing these two thrust and parry, slipping out of the traps each sets up for the other and not bothering to hide how turned-on they’re getting. That turn-on is as much over their own craftiness as each other. Crown and Catherine are supreme egoists and they’d be monsters if they weren’t so sleek and stylish and so entertained by their whole cop-and-robber pursuit.

Sex and work and trickery amount to pretty much the same thing for this pair, and their immense self-satisfaction is the source of both the movie’s sense of humor and its sex appeal. Their flirtation never abates even after they become lovers. Crown and Catherine are mirror images of each other, as Crown’s shrink (Dunaway, who looks great and seems to be having a high old time) tells him. Brosnan and Russo cloak their performances in the best kind of irony, not the hip, superior variety, but the sophisticated sort — they’re capable of being amused at every pickle they land themselves in. The movie gets just a tad soggy when Alan Trustman and Kurt Wimmer’s script has the leads anguish over how they can trust each other. But those slack patches never last for long, and soon Crown and Catherine are gleefully working out some new way to trip each other up, some new form of seduction that will utterly disarm the opposition. Delivering James Bond’s trademark witticisms, Brosnan always seemed in on a joke he isn’t willing to share with the rest of us.

Thomas Crown is, if it’s possible, even more self-involved, but Brosnan shows more wit, and in an odd way, a lot more generosity than he ever has before. And he seems, for once, to be in on the joke of his own absurd handsomeness. He regards himself with the same detached slyness with which he regards everything else. He’s got the lightness that the hero of a romantic caper movie needs and the slight reserve that fits this character. (Which is one reason McQueen didn’t work in the original: The role allowed him none of the regular-guy likability he showed in his best performances.) If Brosnan doesn’t give a truly memorable performance, he’s never less than fun to watch. If nothing else, Russo’s performance should, for a while at least, silence the people who complain that older women are never allowed to be sexy in the movies. That sexiness isn’t just due to the transparent black dress she wears in one scene or the wonderfully unself-conscious way she displays her fabulous body in the nude scenes.

Russo’s sexiness springs from the insinuation she works into her line readings, the way she moves, the way she wears her stunning wardrobe (some of which was designed for the movie by Michael Kors). It’s hard to recall any woman in the movies as spectacularly dressed as Russo is here. She wears a series of knee-length coats and matching skirts or dresses, cashmeres and leathers and suedes that define luxurious; they’re so soft and supple they move with her. And the performance is an example of what’s possible when you cast an actress as a glamorpuss. Russo has been a pleasure in movies like “Tin Cup” and “Ransom.” But she’s never been as ravishing as she is here. Imagination seems no match for the sort of naughty fun promised by every mischievous curl of her lips. As the cop in charge of the case, Denis Leary makes a decisive break with all the faceless actors littering the original (and so does Frankie Faison as his assistant). Leary brings just enough of an edge to his decent regular-guy cop to keep the character from seeming like a baked potato.

And his small speech to Russo about the woman who left him gives the movie a trace of heart while never risking self-pity. As you might expect, “The Thomas Crown Affair” is bigger and glitzier than the original, which was directed by Norman Jewison. Unlike most remakes, McTiernan’s version is superior in every way. Jewison’s film had all the accouterments of style with none of the kicky fun. It was glacial and fragmented, much of it shot using a “now!” multi-image technique. It’s like what Alain Resnais might have come up with if he’d been hired to shoot one of those “What kind of man reads Playboy?” ads. From the credits (a tricky clue to the movie’s final twist) to the fade-out, McTiernan is out to pamper us with cleverness and swank. The opening set piece, a boring bank robbery in Jewison’s film, has become a fleet, intricate heist carried out in broad daylight in the infinitely more photogenic surroundings of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (a set). Deftly executed and edited (by John Wright), the sequence plays like a luxurious tickle.

And McTiernan tops it in the finale, which returns to the Met and features bowler-hatted figures right out of Magritte crossing and crisscrossing the galleries under the eyes of hopelessly muddled security officers. Part of the reason the movie feels so refreshing is that we’re not used to seeing big-budget entertainments that don’t dumb themselves down, that take the almost adolescent appeal of thievery and luxury and sex and make them seem like a sophisticated adult treat. For someone who’s made his career in big-budget pictures, McTiernan has occasionally shown a knowing irony about the movie business. In “Die Hard,” the exteriors of the office skyscraper that gets trashed by Bruce Willis and the terrorists was the spanking new corporate headquarters of 20th Century Fox, the company that released the movie.

Seeing this shiny anonymous new building go kaboom played like a joke on the willingness of the studios to destroy themselves for a hit — like the old story about the exec who said of a star, “If he wanted to burn down the studio, I’d hand him the matches.” The best joke in “The Thomas Crown Affair” comes when a schoolteacher is trying desperately to interest a group of bored kids in a Monet; they perk up only when she tells them it’s worth $100 million. It’s like seeing a meeting of future studio execs. McTiernan has made a movie that knows money by itself is rather dull; the fun lies in what you can do with it. Granted, a Monet has a lot more worth (not just financial) than a Bulgari necklace or a private hilltop villa in Martinique. But the baubles, and the genuine treasures, here are never an end in themselves, they’re always a means to fun. Crown cares more for pulling off the heist than owning the Monet.

If style is the truest morality there is in movies, the thing that can get us rooting for a thief (or even a killer) if he or she has enough savior faire, then “The Thomas Crown Affair” is, by movie standards, impressively moral. It’s delicious. Charles Taylor is a columnist for the Newark Star-Ledger.

Question: Who played the part of Thomas Crown in the 90's remake of the film 'The Thomas Crown Affair'?
Answer: PIERCE BROSNAN